Dismissed¶31

M.Gnanaprakash v. the State Rep by, Inspector of Police

Madras HC9 Jun 2025CRL MP/9414/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Suspension of sentence denied pending appeal; bail refused. Keywords: Crl.M.P.; Crl.A.No.438 of 2025; Spl.S.C.No.124 of 2022; POCSO Act, 2012; Section 6 POCSO; S.366 IPC; S.376(3) IPC; S.376(2)(n) IPC; Section 430(1) BNSS 2023; Section 428 Cr.P.C.; Special Judge for Exclusive Trial of POCSO cases, Tiruvannamalai; conviction dated 27.11.2024; victim aged about 15 years; offence under pretext of marriage; no prima facie case; Madras High Court; G.K. Ilanthiraiyan; advocate V.Ramanareddy; Additional Public Prosecutor S.Raja Kumar.

What did the court decide?

No prima facie case has been made out for suspension of the sentence, since the Trial Court has gone through the evidence in its entirety. ¶29

M.Gnanaprakash Vs the State Rep by, Inspector… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

Crl.M.P.No.9414 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.438 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 09.06.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

Crl.M.P.No.9414 of 2025 in

Crl.A.No.438 of 2025

M.Gnanaprakash

..... Petitioner

The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, Tiruvannamalai

¶12

..... Respondent

¶13

PRAYER : Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 430(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to suspend the sentence and conviction dated 27.11.2024, passed in Spl.S.C.No.124 of 2022, against the petitioner/appellant/1^st Accused by the learned Trial Judge, the Special Judge for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, at Tiruvannamalai, pending disposal of the above appeal and consequently enlarge the petitioner /Appellant/1^st Accused on bail in connection with the Judgment in Spl.S.C.No.124 of 2022, dated 27.11.2024.

¶14

Page 1 of 5

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judishttps://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Ramanareddy

¶17

Crl.M.P.No.9414 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.438 of 2025

¶18

For Respondent : Mr.S.Raja Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER

¶19

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioner,

¶20

seeking suspension of sentence imposed by the learned Special Judge for Exclusive Trial of cases under POCSO Act, 2012, Tiruvannamalai in Spl.S.C.No.124 of 2022, dated 27.11.2024, and enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the above appeal.

¶21

The petitioner, who is arrayed as A1 in Spl.S.C.No. 124 of 2022, were convicted and sentenced by the Special Judge for Exclusive Trial of cases under POCSO Act, 2012, Tiruvannamalai, vide judgment

¶22

dated 27.11.2024, as follows:

¶23

Rank of the	Conviction under Section	Sentence awarded
accused
A1	366 of IPC	To undergo 10 years Rigorous imprisonment with a fine of
		Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo 2 years rigorous imprisonment.
	376(3),	To undergo 20years Rigorous

¶24

Page 2 of 5

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judishttps://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

Crl.M.P.No.9414 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.438 of 2025

¶27

Rank of the accused	Conviction under Section	Sentence awarded
	376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012	imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo 2 years rigorous imprisonment.
	The period alread to be set off unde	y undergone by the accused is ordered r Section 428 Cr.P.C.
3. He	ard the learned co	unsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶28

Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent.

¶29

This Court finds that no prima facie case has been made out for suspension of the sentence since the Trial Court has gone through the evidence in its entirety and also finds that the petitioner had committed very serious and heinous offence as against the victim, who is aged about 15 years old at the time of occurrence, under the pretext of marriage.

¶30